The Road to Legalization of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe Volume 34 Issue 4 Article 4 9-2014 The Road to Legalization of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church Andrew Sorokowski Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree Part of the Catholic Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Eastern European Studies Commons Recommended Citation Sorokowski, Andrew (2014) "The Road to Legalization of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church," Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe: Vol. 34 : Iss. 4 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ree/vol34/iss4/4 This Article, Exploration, or Report is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ROAD TO LEGALIZATION OF THE UKRAINIAN GREEK CATHOLIC CHURCH ByAndrew Sorokowski Andrew Sorokowski is a lawyer and a historical researcher at the U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources Division, in Washington, DC. He received the B.A. degree at University of California, Berkley, M.A. at Harvard University, JD at University of California, Hastings School of Law, and Ph.D. at University of London School of Slavonic and East European Studies. He has lectured extensively at various institution of higher learning in the United States and abroad and authored or edited numerous publication on Ukrainian Church history among them the collection of documents Towards a History of the Ukrainian Patriarchal Movement (Lviv, Ukraine, 2009). At the pseudo-council of L’viv that took place on March 8-10, 1946,the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church (UGCC) supposedly liquidated itself and “returned” to the Russian Orthodox Church.1 As Bohdan Bociurkiw and other scholars have demonstrated, this event was orchestrated by the Soviet security police, with the cooperation of the Patriarchate of Moscow, which had been revived less than three years before.2 Since the UGCC was deemed to no longer exist, parishes that identified themselves as Greek-Catholic could not register with the authorities under the USSR Law on Religious Associations of 1929. Consequently, Greek-Catholic priests could not carry out their duties legally, and were subject to penalties if they did. And yet, there was no known legal document explicitly prohibiting the existence of the Greek-Catholic Church. This made it difficult to agitate for legalization in a technical sense; the Church found itself not so much illegal as extra-legal.3 The anomalous status of the UGCC provided the authorities with a pretext for persecuting its priests, monastics, and laity. The most active members of the Church could be 1 Діяння Собору Греко-Католицької Церкви 8-10 Березня 1946 у Львові (Львів: видання Президії Собору, 1946). 2 Bohdan Rostyslav Bociurkiw, The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church and the Soviet State (1939-1950) (Edmonton and Toronto, Canada: Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies Press, 1996). 3 Thus, as late as May 31, 1991, M. Kolesnyk, chairman of the Ukrainian SSR Council on Religious Affairs, replying to a letter from Myroslav Ivan Cardinal Lubachivsky, pointed out that his Church could not be “rehabilitated” because “there exist no government decisions, judicial or legislative acts prohibiting its activity” (copy in the author’s possession). OCCASIONAL PAPERS ON RELIGION IN EASTERN EUROPE (Augest 2014) Vol.XXXIV No. 4 54 exiled to other parts of the USSR, and thus removed as influences on Ukrainian society. Nevertheless, the absence of legal status had certain advantages. The authorities could not control or co-opt the clergy. Infiltration was difficult. There were no parish councils to undermine the priests’ authority, as was the case with the Orthodox Church. Moreover, a Church existing beyond the law did not have to face the problem of at least implicitly recognizing an anti-religious and politically illegitimate state, and of the ethical compromises that this might entail. Thus, its moral authority among the people, as well as abroad, remained intact. For these and other reasons, not all members of the UGCC favored legalization. Even in the 1980s, when legalization appeared to be a possibility, some of the leaders of the catacomb Church opposed it. Why, then, did it become a rallying cry for many Greek- Catholic activists? There were good reasons to favor legalization. A Church without a visible presence in society had only limited possibilities of serving the needs of the faithful and teaching the faith to succeeding generations. Its contacts with the outside world were limited. The teachings of the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965, for example, did not reach many of the clergy and believers.4 A catacomb Church risked becoming isolated from the rest of Christendom, its spiritual growth stunted. It also had little opportunity to grow in numbers. 5 Legalization, it must be noted, could mean more than one thing. Basically, it meant that the law would recognize the existence and functioning of the Church. It could also mean the registration of parishes and other Church institutions with the local state authorities. Registration meant, in effect, conforming to the 1929 Law on Religious Associations, as amended, and accepting its many restrictions on religious activity, including the education of children and proselytism. The overall intent of that law was to contain religion within an approved structure, permitting state surveillance and control, while fostering the gradual 4 This changed in the 1990s. See Peter Galadza, “The Reception of the Second Vatican Council by Greco- Catholics in Ukraine,” Communio 27 (Summer 2000), 312-39. 5 Andrij Sorokovskyj, Die Lage der Ukrainischen Katholischen Kirche in der Ukraine, Jahrbuch der Ukrainekunde 1988 (Munich: Arbeits- und Förderungsgemeinschaft der Ukrainischen Wissenschaften e.V., 1988), 163-64. OCCASIONAL PAPERS ON RELIGION IN EASTERN EUROPE (Augest 2014) Vol.XXXIV No. 4 55 withering away of religion as a social phenomenon. Thus, legalization in this second sense remained controversial. During Soviet Premier Nikita S. Khrushchev’s anti-religious campaign in 1958-1964, many Orthodox churches were closed in Ukraine. Among them were formerly Greek- Catholic churches in western Ukraine. An unintended result of this campaign was that Greek- Catholic clergy and believers began to hold services in these closed churches. At the same time, the faithful began to present petitions for legalization to the local authorities, though these were routinely rejected.6 In 1979, for example, believers in the villages of Mshana and Zavadiv, L’viv region, demanded the legalization of UGCC parishes.7 On September 9, 1982, the Initiative (or Action) Group for the Defense of the Rights of Believers and the Church was formed, with the political dissident Iosyp Terelia as its chairman and Fr. Hryhorii Budzins’kyi as secretary. Born in 1943, Terelia was from the town of Svalyava in the Transcarpathian region. The three other members of the group were Stefaniia Petrash-Sichko and two priests identified only as Fr. Dionisii and Fr. Ihnatii. It appears to have been formed from Terelia’s Central Committee of Ukrainian Catholics. Its goals were legalization of the UGCC and the defense of its rights. When Terelia was arrested on December 24, 1982, Vasyl’ Kobryn took over as acting chairman, becoming full chairman on March 1, 1984. The Initiative Group published the Chronicle of the Catholic Church in Ukraine, the first issue of which appeared in January 1984. By March 1986, nine issues of the Chronicle had made their way to the West; a tenth issue had been confiscated during the arrest of Vasyl’ Kobryn in L’viv on November 11-12, 1984.8 In an appeal to the government of the USSR, the Initiative Group presented a Memorandum detailing the steps to be taken for legalization of the UGCC. The appeal was signed by Iosyp Terelia as chairman, Fr. Hryhorii Budzins’kyi as secretary, and three members: Stefania Petrash-Sichko, Fr. Dionisii, and Fr. Ihnatii. Interestingly, among the 6 Наталія Дмитришин, «Між опором і пристосуванням: Греко-католицьке релігійне підпілля в системі радянського тотaлітаризму» Ковчег (Львів) ч. 5 (2007) ст. 256-81, ст. 279. 7 Osyp Zinkewych and Andrew Sorokowski, A Thousand Years of Christianity in Ukraine: An Encyclopedic Chronology (New York, Baltimore and Toronto: Smoloskyp, 1988), 255. 8 Ibid., 256; For My Name’s Sake: Selections from the Writings of Yosyp Terelya (Keston, Kent, UK: Keston College, 1986), 5, 20. Андрій Сороковський, «Ініціятивна Група Захисту Прав Віруючих і Церкви» Богословія (Рим) том 50 (1986), ст. 67-82. OCCASIONAL PAPERS ON RELIGION IN EASTERN EUROPE (Augest 2014) Vol.XXXIV No. 4 56 points was that the Church obligated itself to observe all the laws and regulations of the state and to teach its faithful to do likewise. However, the following point stated that since the Church was subordinate to the Pope of Rome, “any submission to the Soviet authorities is impossible.” In the following sentence, it stated that “the law on the separation of the Church from the state should be observed.”9 On July 12, 1983, the Committee for the Defense of the Catholic Faith in L’viv prepared an appeal to the Minister of Internal Affairs of the Ukrainian SSR in Kyiv. It was signed by Vasyl’ Kobryn, acting chairman, and Fr. Hryhorii Budzins’kyi as secretary. The document demanded the cessation of false propaganda about the supposed self-liquidation of the UGCC in the pseudo-council of L’viv of March 1946. It requested that the minister instruct the regional executive committees in the western regions of Ukraine to not impede the registration of Catholic parishes. Citing the Constitution of the USSR, the appeal declared that the government had no right to liquidate the Catholic faith or church.10 In March 1985 President Mikhail Gorbachev took office and undertook a broad range of reforms as part of his program of glasnost’ (open discussion of social problems) and perestroika (rebuilding of society).